JUSTIFICATION BY WORKS

VS

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH

 

COMPARING SCRIPTURE WITH SCRIPTURE

 

The letter James wrote is a very practical letter. Of that there is very little dispute among believers. Beyond this, however, there is a great deal of what I believe to be unnecessary controversy and confusion over what James taught concerning justification by works and what Paul taught concerning justification by faith. Most Christians are familiar with an important and valid principle of interpreting Scripture that involves comparing Scripture with Scripture. Basically this principle says that for a complete and accurate understanding of any given topic, we need to compare what Scripture says in one place with it what it says in other places, on that same topic. I would wholeheartedly agree.

 

CORRECTING SCRIPTURE WITH SCRIPTURE

 

Relative to what James and Paul taught on justification, however, often it is not really a comparison of what Scripture says in one place with what Scripture says on the same matter in another place that creates confusion and confusion. Rather, well-meaning but misguided believers (Evangelical Pastors, Scholars, and Theologians included) are engaging in (however unwittingly) the much different practice of correcting Scripture with Scripture. Correcting one Scripture with another Scripture is evident when the meaning and message of what is clearly taught in one place is redefined, modified, changed, altered etc. to conform to what is clearly (or believed to be) taught elsewhere, presumably on the same topic.

 

GOD IS ALWAYS RIGHT

 

Pastor Chuck insists that:

If your interpretation of the passage makes it contradict other passages of Scripture, then your interpretation is wrong, because God did not say anything foolish, nor did God contradict himself.[1]

If God is right the first time He speaks on a topic and every time He speaks on a topic, then we never need to correct one Scripture with another Scripture. Without a doubt, some passages speak more clearly, directly, or completely on a topic than other passages on the same topic. One passage may provide information on a topic not found in other passages addressing the same topic. And of course, it would be foolish not to allow the more complete discussion of a matter to shed light on a less direct or even obscure comment on the same topic.

 

JAMES AND PAUL-CLEAR AND COMPLETE

 

Some devout Christians, while formally accepting the letter of James as inspired Scripture, nevertheless effectively deny much of what he taught by reinterpreting it in light of what Paul taught. Still, others do the reverse. That is, they effectively deny what Paul taught reinterpreting Paul's teaching to conform to what James taught. The problem is that we cannot legitimately force Paul to say what James said anymore than we can legitimately force James to say what Paul said, without distorting the respective message of each. Furthermore, there is no need to.

 

Both James and Paul were clear and complete in what they taught justification by works and justification by faith respectively. None of this is to suggest that there is disagreement between Paul and James. Just the opposite is true. Rather, it is to say that when we try to make their different messages the exact same message, we are manifesting a misunderstanding of at least one of them. Let us consider some of what Paul said regarding justification:

 

Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness (Rom. 4:3, Gal. 3:6).

*Because of Abraham's faith, God credited Abraham with righteousness. In gaining this righteousness from God, Abraham'simply believed God'[2]

Paul explains that:

 

'To him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted to him for righteousness (Rom. 4:5).

Again:

"God gives righteousness to those who believe (v. 3). The person who does not work, who comes to God by faith alone"[3]

The apostle Paul insists that:

David describes the man to whom God imparts righteousness apart from works (Rom. 4:6).

And:

By grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast (Eph. 2:8-9).

A suicidal jailor asks:

What must I do to be saved (Acts 16:30)?

That was the question put to Paul and Silas two thousand years ago. Their answer is as true today as it was then. That is:

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved (Acts 16:31).

This verse (and many others in the New Testament such as those just previously mentioned) gave rise to what is called sola fidei, which refers to faith alone as the sole, necessecary, sufficient condition for salvation as in justification and regeneration. Stated differently, this is the biblical teaching which says that justification and regeneration and (or salvation in the most foundational sense) are to be found by grace alone, through faith alone and in Christ alone. Again, according to this view, faith in Christ is the sole, sufficient and necessary condition for salvation from the penalty of sin. With sola fide in mind, let us now consider some of what James said about justification or salvation from the power of sin. With justification by works in mind, the apostle James asks:

 

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith, but does not have works? Can faith save him (Jam. 2:14)?

And:

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac on the altar (Jam. 2:21)?

James also says that:

Faith was working with works, and by works faith was perfected (Jam. 2:22).

He then reasons as follows:

You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only (Jam. 2:24).

*James clearly teaches justification by faith, for he quotes Gen. 15:6 in v. 23, which obviously connects the crediting of righteousness, that is, salvation, to Abraham's belief (see Paul's explanation of Gen. 15:6 in Rom. 4:1). The justification by works of which James is speaking is a different type of justification...[4]

With what Paul taught about justification in mind, Evangelicals formally agree that we are justified by faith alone. Yet, based on what they believe James taught some Evangelicals say that this same faith is never alone. Stated differently, Evangelicals formally agree that we are justified by faith without works. Yet some of these same Evangelicals say that this same faith is never without works.  As a point of logic, however, you cannot say that faith alone does anything alone if it is never alone. If it is never alone, it does not even exist alone to do anything alone. In like manner, you cannot say that faith without works does anything without works if faith is never without works. Again, it would not (by definition) exist so it could not (by definition) do anything. This can be stated in two different ways:

 

Nothing never does anything.

Nothing always does nothing.

 

Allow me to illustrate the logical problem. Suppose I said I was alone when I found a lost treasure. Suppose everyone agreed with me that when I found the lost treasure I was alone. Yet, some who say they agree that I was alone when I found the lost treasure also say that I am never alone. Obviously, if I were never alone, I could not have been alone when I found the lost treasure. Stated differently, if I were to say that I found the lost treasure without my friend with me, I could not (logically) say that I never go anywhere without my friend.

 

That is precisely the kind of contradiction that is represented when someone says that it is faith alone that justifies but that the faith that justifies is never alone. In fact, it should be obvious that it is a clear contradiction to say that faith is alone with regard to justification and then say that faith is never alone with regard to this same justification. In the same way, it should be evident that it is clearly a contradiction to say that it is faith without works with regard to salvation but that faith is never without works with regard to this same salvation.

 

There is, of course, a solution to the apparent problem in reconciling what James said with what Paul said about what is required for justification and salvation. I say apparent problem because there is no real objective problem. Accurately understood, James and Paul both taught the absolute truth. They do not need to be reconciled because they are not at odds or in conflict. Pastor Chuck is right when he says "The justification by works of which James is speaking is a different type of justification". Therein is the interpretive key. Once that is understood and factored in, the apparent problem disappears. The solution is found in understanding the different but equally legitimate, and non-contradictory ways these terms are used by James and Paul respectively.

 

Again, however, we should begin by admitting that if the justification in James letter is the same justification referred to in Paul's letter, we have a contradiction. In like manner, if the word salvation referred to in James 2:24 is used in exactly the same way as is the word saved in Ephesians 2:8-9 we must accept that Scripture contradicts itself through what would amount to very different and diametrically opposed views expressed by James and Paul respectively. Suppose I said I used the slang word "hot" when referring to the popularity of a certain make and year of a sports car. Now suppose I say that when I looked underneath the hood of the same car I noticed that it was very hot. The same word is used in different ways without confusion or contradiction. That is simply the nature of language.

 

When James says or suggests that a person needs works to be saved, he is not speaking to or about unbelievers and the faith they need to be justified and saved from the penalty of sin. He is speaking to and about believers and the faith-based works they need to be justified and saved from the power of sin. When Paul speaks about justification and salvation from the penalty of sin, he is speaking to and about unbelievers. Thus, there is a justification and salvation for the unregenerate and unsaved and there is another justification and salvation for the already regenerate and saved.

 

Evangelicals agree (or at least should) that those who are saved (i.e., regenerated and justified in the Pauline sense) by grace are saved without works. Evangelicals should also agree that those saved by grace without works are called to do good works when they are saved (Eph. 2:8-10). Thus, even though Paul emphatically teaches that human works are not involved in getting a lost man justified and saved, few think it strange that Paul tells Christians as the no longer lost but saved persons to:

 

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" (Phil. 2:12).

An unbelieving lost person has (in a manner of speaking) salvation worked in by God when he is saved by grace, through faith, and without works. A believer's salvation is worked out when he does what a saved by grace through faith believer is supposed to do (Eph. 2:8-10). The former is a salvation without works involved and the latter is a salvation that requires works. Even so, an unbeliever is justified (in the sense in which Paul uses the word) by God without works, as a believer is justified (in the sense in which James uses the word) by God when he puts his faith to work.

 

In the first justification, works are irrelevant. In the second justification works are essential. That is, a believer that is justified (i.e., Paul) without works or by faith alone is also called upon by God to do good works, was recreated in Christ Jesus for good works, and is even justified in this second sense (i.e., James) by those good faith-based works. Believing in Christ makes us righteous before God because God declares us to be righteous when we believe in His Son. This is sometimes referred to as positional righteousness. It is imputed righteousness or declared righteousness. It is based not on who we are or what we do but on who Christ is and on what He did. It is His righteousness imputed to us or as it is sometimes said, credited to our account.

 

It is a totally different and distinctive matter when God considers us (and our behavior) righteous when we (believers as believers) obey Him and do what is right before Him. This is sometimes called practical righteousness. Practical righteousness is produced only as we yeild to the Holy Spirit of God in concert with Holy Word of God. Righteousness in this sense does depend on us and what we do and even on what we don't do. Unfortunately, the positionally righteous (i.e., all believers in Christ) are not always (as they should be) practically righteous. To live righteously is in accordance with our new regnerate nature and or new and eternal position.

 

Sometimes this is referred to as our eternal and unchanging standing before God. It is to be distinguished from our temporal and changing state. To practice righteousness (and therefore be justified as James typically uses this term) you must be a believer and in fact believe. Therefore this kind of righteousness (i.e., living a righteous or justified life) cannot be without faith. Works that are pleasing to God need a faith that is pleasing to God as their foundation and motivation (Heb. 11:6). The good works that justify a believer are born of faith.

 

It is not enough to have works alone in this secondary sense. You must have faith to do the work that pleases God and that results in your justification in this secondary sense. It is not enough to have faith alone. In the sense that James uses the term, you need both faith and works. You need a faith that works or a working faith. In fact, those mentioned in the scriptural hall of faith are mentioned in recognition of their works of faith (Heb. 11:1-40). The positionally righteous are positionally righteous or justified without works, but they cannot be practically righteous or justified without works.

 

James does not teach that the only way to be justified is with faith and works. That would be to contradict Paul and is found nowhere in the letter James wrote. Instead what James says is that faith alone justification is not the only kind of justification. Pay particular attention to what he says on this very point. For the unbeliever is is truly faith alone and in Christ alone that is required to become justified in what I am calling the Pauline sense. For the believer it not not faith only that but faith and works or faith with works, working faith or a faith that works for Christ that justifies in the way James is using the word justification. James says:

 

You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only (Jam. 2:24).

James does not say a man is not justified by faith alone. That would be to contradict Paul. He says a man is not justified by faith only. Conversely, Paul does not teach that a man is justified by faith only. That would be to contradict James. He says a man is justified by faith alone. This is exactly what Paul meant when he said:

 

Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness (Rom. 4:3).

No works were involved in the imputation of this first justification or righteousness. However, when James refers to this latter justification of Abraham, he (Abraham) was already justified by faith alone. Thus, the justification referred to by James was an additional justification based upon and resulting from the faith-based works (or the sacrifice) of Abraham. Thus, when Abraham went to the altar to sacrifice His Son in obedience to God, it was a sacrifice (or work) based on faith of his faith at work. That is:

 

By faith, Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac...concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead... (Heb. 11:17-19).

This is exactly what James referred to when he said:

 

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac on the altar (Jam. 2:21)?

If Abraham was already justified (and remained justified till the time of this faith-based sacrifice) by faith alone, then it follows that although faith alone justifies a man before God, faith alone justification is not the only justification there is. An unbeliever becomes justified when he believes without works. A believer is justified by works when he, in faith, obeys God. Imagine if you can, Abraham as an unbeliever sacrificing His Son in unbelief. Would that result in justification? I do not think so. We know, however, that Abraham was justified before this sacrifice (or work of faith) and that this sacrifice was not required for his first justification.

 

Again, James recognized that it was through faith alone that Abraham was justified without works, even as Abraham became the example of the importance of a justification by works (or works of faith) for the believer. For Paul, the good works that we are created in Christ Jesus to do, require the salvation which is by grace alone and through faith alone and in Christ alone (Eph. 2:8-10).The works that James says justify us assumes faith as the foundation of those works. Paul refers to this same kind of work as the "work of faith" (1 Thess. 1:3). With justification in this first sense and Galatians 2: 16 in mind, Martin Luther explains that:

 

We are justified through faith in Christ, not through our own efforts. We shouldn't let anyone confuse us by saying that faith justifies people only when love and good works are added to it...This faith justifies us apart from love and prior to love.

Luther goes on to explain that:

 

We concede that we must teach about good works and love. But we only teach this at the proper time and place-when the question deals with how we should live, not how we are justified.

Still with justification as it is discussed Galatians 2: 16 in view, Luther concludes that:

 

The question here is this: How do we become justified and receive eternal life? We answer with Paul that we are pronounced righteous through faith in Christ alone, not by our own efforts.[5]

God corrects us through Scripture but He never corrects Himself because He never needs to. Again, He is right the first time He speaks on a topic and every time He speaks on a topic (1 Tim. 3:16-17). If one Scripture can correct another Scripture, then God would be correcting Himself. This is exactly what we are saying (or inadvertently accusing God of) when we say that faith alone justifies or saves but that faith is never alone. Often we need to read one portion of Scripture to better understand another portion of Scripture. However, any time we allow our understanding of one Scripture to correct or change the meaning of another Scripture we are making manifest that we necessarily misunderstand at least one of these Scriptures.

 

P.S.: As an aside, when Paul says we are justified by faith without works and when James says we are justified by faith with works, they do not mean that the power to justify (in either sense) is actually in our faith (without works or in our faith with works). For Paul tells us, "...it is God that justifies" just as it "is Christ that died" (Rom 8: 33). Nevertheless, in the sense in which Paul typically uses the term, God justifies on the condition of faith alone in Christ alone. In the sense that James typically uses the term, God justifies on condition that we put our faith in Christ to work for Christ. Speaking of the past tense of salvation in mind, which incorporates justification and regeneration, Dr. Radmacher explains that:

 

**Faith itself does not save. That is, we are saved only when we place our faith in the right object, namely, Jesus Christ. Some people question the validity of faith alone. They believe that works are necessary along with faith. For support they refer to James 2:19, which says the demons believe and tremble. So, they argue, believing is not sufficient. But the question is, "What do demons believe?" They believe that God is one (James 2:19), that is, they are monotheists. So are millions of others, and that is not sufficient to save.  Demons do not believe that Jesus died for their sins and that they can be saved through placing their faith in Him. In other words, believing that God exists does not save. But believing that Jesus died for your sins and was raised again for your justification does save" (Romans 4:24-25).[6]  

Pastor Michael Cocoris says essentially the same. That is:

**Faith does not save. Faith is not magic; there is no saving virtue in it. Christ saves. Faith is merely the means by which the benefits of Christ's death are applied to the individual. The New Testament does not teach that a person is saved on account of his faith, but rather, that he is saved through faith.  The saving power resides not in the act of faith, nor in the nature of faith, but exclusively in the object of faith - Christ"The issue"is not the amount, but the object of faith. The question is whether the object of faith is able to do the job. A great amount of faith in a bridge too weak to support you would do you no good, but a small amount of faith in a bridge that would support you - just enough to get you on it - is enough to get you across it.[7]

As a supposed solution for the very real problem of believers not living up to their responsibilities as believers, some are suggesting that we "help out" the biblical doctrine of salvation by grace through faith (regarding justification and regeneration) by adding good works to faith as a necessary ingredient of faith or supplement to grace or some other such thing. Dr. Radmacher is concerned that:

**Many wise pastors have insisted that the basis for knowing that I am a Christian is not what I do but what God's Word says about what Christ has done and continues to do for those who have believed (John 1:12; 1 John 5:13). I know I belong to Christ because I have believed in Jesus Christ as my only Savior and Redeemer from eternal destruction. It's not the evidences of my life that are my basis for knowing that. It's the Word of God. God said it. That settles it. I am fearful of those today, who because of a genuine, valid concern about the lack of growth and the lack of evident Christian lifestyle, are willing to try to prop up the Gospel by adding to it.[8]

The error is not in a desire (or in efforts to) to see or encourage good and godly works among believers. Rather, it is a failure to see that what is required of justification and regeneration is not sufficient for sanctification and maturation. Good works and godliness are necessary to glorify, honor and please God. Let there be no mistake about this. Rather than require what God does not require (or add to what God does require) of the lost for justification and regeneration, those called to the ministry of teaching and discipling believers, need to focus their efforts and attention on what is required for sanctification and maturation.